Author Archives: HV Shred

Court Rules Garbage is Public Domain

Posted on by HV Shred
Summary:

In 1988, the US Supreme Court ruled in the California v. Greenwood case that garbage is public domain. The case involved the police departments search of a drug dealers trash. They found enough drug paraphernalia to issue a warrant for his arrest and eventual conviction. Although Greenwoods attorney appealed that the search violated his 4th Amendment rights which limit search and seizure, the Court ruled 6 to 2 that the search was legal.
The Courts decision overturned the 1974 Privacy Act and stated that garbage is subject to inspection to seizure by anyone, including criminals and corporate competitors. Dumpster Diving has since become the number one source of corporate espionage and consumer fraud in this country.

Detail:

California vs Greenwood
No. 86-684
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
486 U.S. 35
January 11, 1988
May 16, 1988

CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Syllabus
Acting on information indicating that respondent Greenwood might be engaged in narcotics trafficking, police twice obtained from his regular trash collector garbage bags left on the curb in front of his house. On the basis of items in the bags which were indicative of narcotics use, the police obtained warrants to search the house, discovered controlled substances during the searches, and arrested respondents on felony narcotics charges. Finding that probable cause to search the house would not have existed without the evidence obtained from the trash searches, the State Superior Court dismissed the charges under People v. Krivda, 5 Cal.3d 357, 486 P.2d 1262, which held that warrantless trash searches violate the Fourth Amendment and the California Constitution. Although noting a post-Krivda state constitutional amendment eliminating the exclusionary rule for evidence seized in violation of state, but not federal, law, the State Court of Appeal affirmed on the ground that Krivda was based on federal, as well as state, law.

Held:

1. The Fourth Amendment does not prohibit the warrantless search and seizure of garbage left for collection outside the curtilage of a home. Pp. 39-44 .

(a) Since respondents voluntarily left their trash for collection in an area particularly suited for public inspection, their claimed expectation of privacy in the inculpatory items they discarded was not objectively reasonable. It is common knowledge that plastic garbage bags left along a public street are readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops, and other members of the public. Moreover, respondents placed their refuse at the curb for the express purpose of conveying it to a third party, the trash collector, who might himself have sorted through it or permitted others, such as the police, to do so. The police cannot reasonably be expected to avert their eyes from evidence of criminal activity that could have been observed by any member of the public. Pp. 43-44 .

(b) Greenwood’s alternative argument that his expectation of privacy in his garbage should be deemed reasonable as a matter of federal constitutional law because the warrantless search and seizure of his garbage was impermissible as a matter of California law under Krivda, [p*36] which he contends survived the state constitutional amendment, is without merit. The reasonableness of a search for Fourth Amendment purposes does not depend upon privacy concepts embodied in the law of the particular State in which the search occurred; rather, it turns upon the understanding of society as a whole that certain areas deserve the most scrupulous protection from government invasion. There is no such understanding with respect to garbage left for collection at the side of a public street. Pp. 43-44 .

2. Also without merit is Greenwood’s contention that the California constitutional amendment violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Just as this Court’s Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule decisions have not required suppression where the benefits of deterring minor police misconduct were overbalanced by the societal costs of exclusion, California was not foreclosed by the Due Process Clause from concluding that the benefits of excluding relevant evidence of criminal activity do not outweigh the costs when the police conduct at issue does not violate federal law. Pp. 44-45 .

182 Cal.App.3d 729, 227 Cal.Rptr. 539, reversed and remanded.

WHITE, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which REHNQUIST, C.J., and BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O’CONNOR, and SCALIA, JJ., joined. BRENNAN, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which MARSHALL, J., joined, post, p. 45 . KENNEDY, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. [p*37]

Opinions
WHITE, J., Opinion of the Court

JUSTICE WHITE delivered the opinion of the Court.

Source:

http://www.fightidentitytheft.com/shred_supreme_court.html

ID THEFT TRENDS FOR 2010

Posted on by HV Shred
The ID Theft Resource center recently released its overview of trends in identity theft for 2010.  The following are areas to be wary as ID thieves get more and more creative:

  • Increasing unemployment makes jobless vulnerable to job listing scams
  • Otherwise honest people with maxed credit cards will turn criminal for quick cash–maybe using phony ads in on-line auctions, dumpster diving, and phone calls to get personally identifying information
  • In-family cases will increase–those closest to us (friends, family, roommates, co-workers) have always been a significant source of id thieves
  • ID theft of children’s SSN will increase
  • Medical ID theft will increase as more people become unemployed and lose benefits
  • Computer hackers will continue to wreak havoc–use strong passwords and on-line security software
  • Those applying for government assistance may find benefits temporarily denied with id thieves capitlizing on weaknesses in the system
  • As above, criminals capitalize on weaknesses in the system to avoid being tied to their own criminal record
  • Social media remains low hanging fruit for identity thieves–be cautious and take advantage of security systems


RESULTS OF 2009 ID THEFT SURVEY: GOOD NEWS AND BADS NEWS

Posted on by HV Shred

The latest identity theft research study released February, 2010 by Javelin Strategy & Research found that the number of identity fraud victims in the United States increased 12 percent to 11.1 million adults in 2009, while the total annual fraud amount increased by 12.5 percent to $54 billion . The report found that protection of data by consumers and businesses and enlisting assistance in resolution are helping consumers and businesses resolve fraud more quickly, and are also reducing or eliminating costs for the consumer. Average fraud resolution time dropped 30 percent to 21 hours, and nearly half of victims now file police reports, resulting in double the reported arrests, triple the prosecutions, and double the percentage of convictions in 2009.

Now in its seventh consecutive year, the comprehensive identity fraud survey report is independently produced by Javelin Strategy & Research and co-sponsored by leading companies in financial services and identity fraud prevention technology and resolution. The survey is the nation’s longest-running study of identity fraud, with more than 29,000 U.S. respondents over the past seven years.

“The 2010 Identity Fraud Survey Report shows that fraud increased for the second straight year and is at the highest rate since Javelin began this report in 2003 ,” said James Van Dyke, president and founder, Javelin Strategy & Research. “The good news is consumers are getting more aggressive in monitoring, detecting and preventing fraud with the help of technology and partnerships with financial institutions, government agencies and resolution services. Through IDSafety.net and our free consumer report, Javelin and our co-sponsor partners are working to educate consumers and provide guidelines and tips to help them safeguard their personal information.”

The above is excerpted from a recent press release by Javelin Strategy & Research.

HV Shred Sponsors Legislative Action Breakfast

Posted on by HV Shred

Always interested in contributing to the business community, HV Shred was honored to be among the sponsors for the Dutchess County Regional Chamber of Commerce’s National Legislative Action Update Breakfast at the Poughkeepsie Grand Hotel on April 6th, 2010.  The keynote speaker, US Senator Charles Schumer, sent out a generally upbeat message to the gathering of roughly 250 local business people.

He cited tourism and technology as hot growth areas for the Hudson Valley.

We at HV Shred are looking forward to the promise of participating in improving economic times with our Hudson Valley colleagues.

THINK LOCAL FIRST!

HV Shred partners with local institutions to protect the community

Posted on by HV Shred

Aiming to make the security and simplicity of on-site shredding accessible to all our neighbors in the Hudson Valley, HV Shred, Inc. partners with local institutions to offer community shred events.  We thank our partners at Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union, Walden Federal Bank, Catskill Hudson Bank, Mahopac National Bank, Wallkill Valley Federal Savings & Loan, Bridgeway Federal Credit Union, and Mid Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union.  We appreciate the opportunity to help defend against identity theft and preserve our local environment.  The goal is also to raise awareness about identity theft prevention–education is key to heading off a problem not only costly to individuals and businesses, but also to the community (and world) at large.

HV Shred is the official shredding service for the Dutchess Chamber

Posted on by HV Shred

Thanks to everyone who attended our ribbon shredding!   We are proud to be the exclusive shredding service for both offices of The Dutchess County Regional Chamber of Commerce.  Here we are with our fantastic supporters cutting the ribbon in front of an HV Shred console with the graphics specially created by Tristan Wellling from FastSigns for the Dutchess County Regional Chamber of Commerce.

Among those pictured are Wayne Quint of Quint Investments & Insurance; John White of Staff Line, Inc.; Jeff Salmonese of Majestic Printing; Rob Weiss of Atlas Star Copiers; William Schlesinger of Cary Institute of Ecosystems Studies; Steve Diamond of Gellert & Klein; Joan Giewat of the American Red Cross Blood Donor Center; John Tkazyik, Mayor of the City of Poughkeepsie; Jeff Papo of Tuminaro Pharmacy; and, of course, Fran and Judith Papo of HV Shred, Inc.

DOCUMENT RETENTION-SUGGESTED GUIDELINES

Posted on by HV Shred
Maybe it’s a good thing that the April 15th tax deadline and the urge to spring clean coincide. It feels good to throw out some of the financial records stuffing your filing cabinets. But before you head for the dumpster, make sure you’re not disposing of records you may need. You don’t want to be caught empty-handed if an IRS auditor contacts you.   The following are suggested guidelines; please check with your tax/industry professionals for specifics to your unique situation.
In general, you must keep records that support items shown on your individual tax return until the statute of limitations runs out — generally three years from the due date of the return, or the date you filed, whichever is later. In most cases, the IRS can audit your return for three years. You can also file an amended return on Form 1040X during this time period if you missed a deduction, overlooked a credit or misreported income.

So, does that mean you’re safe from an audit after three years? Not necessarily. There are exceptions. For example:

If the IRS has reason to believe your income was understated by 25 percent or more, the statute of limitations for an audit increases to six years.
If there is suspicion of fraud or you don’t file a tax return at all, there is no time limit for the IRS.
How Long to Keep Documents

Like most issues involving the IRS or other government agencies, there’s no easy answer to that question. The IRS does not require you to keep records in any particular way. But here are some basic guidelines to follow for individuals (Guidelines for businesses are in the right-hand chart):


Completed tax returns. Many tax advisers recommend that you hold onto copies of your finished tax returns forever. Why? So you can prove to the IRS that you actually filed. Even if you don’t keep the returns indefinitely, you should hang onto them for at least six years after they are due or filed, whichever is later.


Backup records. Any written evidence that supports figures on your tax return, such as receipts, expense logs, bank notices and sales records, should generally be kept for at least the three year period.


Exceptions. There are some cases when taxpayers get more than the usual three years to file an amended return. You have up to seven years to take deductions for bad debts or worthless securities, so don’t toss out records that could result in refund claims for those items.


Real estate records. Keep these for as long as you own the property, plus three years after you dispose of it and report the transaction on your tax return. Throughout ownership, keep records of the purchase, as well as receipts for home improvements, relevant insurance claims, and documents relating to refinancing. These help prove your adjusted basis in the home, which is needed to figure the taxable gain at the time of sale, or to support calculations for rental property or home office deductions.


Securities. To accurately report taxable events involving stocks and bonds, you must maintain detailed records of purchases and sales. These records should include dates, quantities, prices, dividend reinvestment, and investment expenses, such as broker fees. Keep these records for as long as you own the investments, plus the statute of limitations on the relevant tax returns.


Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). The IRS requires you to keep copies of Forms 8606, 5498 and 1099-R until all the money is withdrawn from your IRA accounts. With the introduction of Roth IRAs, it’s more important than ever to hold onto all IRA records pertaining to contributions and withdrawals in case you’re ever questioned.
If an account is closed, treat IRA records with the same rules as securities. Don’t dispose of any ownership documentation until the statute of limitations expires.


Issues affecting more than one year. Records that support figures affecting multiple years, such as carryovers of charitable deductions, net operating loss carrybacks or carryforwards or casualty losses, need to be saved until the deductions no longer have effect, plus seven years, according to IRS instructions.

These general recordkeeping guidelines are for tax purposes. Insurance companies and creditors may have other requirements.

Understanding Behavioral Targeting

Posted on by HV Shred
Excerpted from Inside 1:1 Privacy

Behavioral Targeting; American Attitudes and Awareness

TRUSTe, in collaboration with global market insight and information group TNS, conducted an online study on American Internet users’ knowledge, attitudes and concerns about behavioral targeting and its online privacy implications. The study indicates that though most Americans are aware that their Internet activities are being tracked for purposes of targeting advertising, there is a high level of concern associated with that tracking, regardless of any association with personally identifiable information.


* 71 percent of online consumers are aware that their browsing information may be collected by a third party for advertising purposes;
* Only 40 percent are familiar with the term “behavioral targeting;”
* 57 percent of respondents say they are not comfortable with advertisers using that browsing history to serve relevant ads, even when that information cannot be tied to their names or any other personal information.

Free Credit Report-Q and A

Posted on by HV Shred

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires each of the nationwide consumer reporting companies — Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion — to provide you with a free copy of your credit report, at your request, once every 12 months. The FCRA promotes the accuracy and privacy of information in the files of the nation’s consumer reporting companies. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the nation’s consumer protection agency, enforces the FCRA with respect to consumer reporting companies.

A credit report includes information on where you live, how you pay your bills, and whether you’ve been sued or arrested, or have filed for bankruptcy. Nationwide consumer reporting companies sell the information in your report to creditors, insurers, employers, and other businesses that use it to evaluate your applications for credit, insurance, employment, or renting a home.

Here are the details about your rights under the FCRA and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions (FACT) Act, which established the free annual credit report program.

Q: How do I order my free report?
A: The three nationwide consumer reporting companies have set up a central website, a toll-free telephone number, and a mailing address through which you can order your free annual report.

To order, visit annualcreditreport.com, call 1-877-322-8228, or complete the Annual Credit Report Request Form and mail it to: Annual Credit Report Request Service, P.O. Box 105281, Atlanta, GA 30348-5281. The form is on the back of this brochure; or you can print it from ftc.gov/credit. Do not contact the three nationwide consumer reporting companies individually. They are providing free annual credit reports only through annualcreditreport.com, 1-877-322-8228, and Annual Credit Report Request Service, P.O. Box 105281, Atlanta, GA 30348-5281.

You may order your reports from each of the three nationwide consumer reporting companies at the same time, or you can order your report from each of the companies one at a time. The law allows you to order one free copy of your report from each of the nationwide consumer reporting companies every 12 months.

More…

PAPER DOCS MAJOR FACTOR IN DATA BREACHES

Posted on by HV Shred
Though it is the widely held belief that identity theft is predominantly a result of increased business conducted electronically, The Security of Paper Documents in the Workplace study conducted by Ponemon Institute in October, 2008 showed paper documents are a still the major hazard.  In this study, the vast majority of respondents (80%) who self-reported that their organizations had a data breach, state that they had one or more data breaches in the past 12 months. Forty-nine percent state that one or more of these data breaches involved the loss or theft of paper documents.

In fact, 71% of participants in the study reported being aware of an incident in which sensitive or confidential paper documents were lost or misplaced in their organization and 53% believe that employees are putting them at risk at communal printers, in meeting rooms or at meetings held outside the office.

The final survey sample consisted of 819 individuals who work in IT operations, IT security, data protection and compliance in large organizations in a variety of industries.

Achieving data security is a function both of proper access to information (the secretary probably should not have access to payroll data) and clear data management policies.  By outsourcing shredding, companies can be relieved of backlogs from busy employees or slow/broken down shredders.  The locked containers further restrict unauthorized access to the paperwork.

More details of the study…